Senate approves public records amendment

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - The state Senate approved a constitutional amendment Wednesday that would guarantee the public's right to inspect local government public records while shifting the cost away from the state budget.

The proposed amendment would end a requirement that the state reimburse local governments for their costs of complying with the California Public Records Act.

The amendment, SCA3, passed on a 37-0 vote and goes to the Assembly. If it receives the required two-thirds majority support in that house, as expected, the amendment would go before voters in June 2014.

A budget proposal by Gov. Jerry Brown sought to end the mandate and instead make compliance with the Public Records Act optional. He said it would save the state money, but his administration could not say exactly how much.

Lawmakers reversed their approval after media and good government groups objected, saying the provision meant some local governments could decide not to provide documents if doing so were merely optional.

SCA3 would clarify that governments must provide the documents - and pay the cost of complying.

"The public's access to its government and operations is a fundamental component of our democracy," said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, the measure's author. He urged his colleagues to "allow the voters of California to clarify in the Constitution that public records are available to the public and public meetings are open to the public."

While there is no formal opposition to the bill, local officials testified during a Senate committee hearing that they are worried about the potential costs of complying with state public records requirements, especially if those requirements expand in the future. Costs typically include staff time and copying.

The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that it could cost the state general fund tens of millions of dollars annually to reimburse local governments and agencies for complying with document requests.

The costs stem from a May 2011 decision by the Commission on State Mandates, which ruled that local agencies could seek state reimbursement for complying with parts of the Public Records Act. However, the commission has not finished calculating the reimbursement rates, so the state has not yet had to make payments to the local governments.

The Legislature's lawyers determined that enshrining the records mandate in the California Constitution would not prevent lawmakers from later changing the law to remove exemptions.

Leno said that only that broad guarantee would be added to the Constitution, leaving the Public Records Act and Brown Act as statutes and making future changes easier.